You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The risk of conclusion change in systematic review updates can be estimated by learning from a database of published examples
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, March 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.02.015 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rabia Bashir, Didi Surian, Adam G Dunn |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 8 | 33% |
| Australia | 2 | 8% |
| France | 2 | 8% |
| Canada | 2 | 8% |
| Germany | 2 | 8% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 4% |
| Italy | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 6 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 58% |
| Scientists | 7 | 29% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 17% |
| Librarian | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 11 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 20% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 17% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 13 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 March 2019.
All research outputs
#3,021,378
of 25,692,343 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
#1,152
of 4,826 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,541
of 367,896 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
#27
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,692,343 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,826 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 367,896 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.